 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Collins v. Wilson6/4/1999 ate of his legal injury. Instead, it is enough that the jury determined, in Collins' own proposed language, " ased upon a preponderance of the evidence," that Collins discovered or should have discovered "his legal injury prior to March 24, 1991." Collins argues that, absent the jury's identifying a specific date of discovery, the trial court and the appellate courts are left "to guess what the jury was thinking." However, in this case the evidence is sufficiently straightforward to eliminate such guesswork.
The jury did not experience some mystical epiphany in reaching their verdict; rather, their verdict was based upon the totality of the evidence, following four days of testimony and evidence, including evidence of numerous conversations and letters between the Collinses and their doctors discussing the possible connection between the surgery and Collins' motility problems. We therefore cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to use Collins' proposed verdict form.
CONCLUSION
In view of the foregoing analysis, we reject each of Collins' three assignments of error and uphold the jury's verdict barring Collins' allegations under the statute of limitations governing medical malpractice. The judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed.
Associate Chief Justice Durham, Justice Zimmerman, and Justice Russon concur in Chief Justice Howe's opinion.
Justice Stewart concurs in the result.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Utah Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|